What a Riot

While England recovers from its latest night of broken glass and the traditional finger-pointing begins (bad parents, laziness, computer games etc. etc.) I thought I'd share a quote from a fellow Fifer. Book one, chapter one. Something that's been in print since 1776 and which surely one or two of our millionaire cabinet members will have read.

"It is the great multiplication of the productions of all the different arts, in consequence of the division of labour, which occasions, in a well-governed society, that universal opulence which extends itself to the lowest ranks of the people."

Adam Smith, The Wealth Of Nations

A friend of mine made the observation that pretty much any civilisation's golden age (Roman, Egyptian, British, French...) begins with massive industry, productivity and "universal opulence", and ends with an enormously rich and powerful elite that have normalised their own corruption and have become far removed from the society they were chosen to govern. It seems to be the nature of things that, rather than trickling downwards, wealth and power gradually percolates to the top.

The corruption of the elite becomes so engrained that we begin to accept it as the truth by which we all must live. So we accept being robbed by well-groomed, smooth-talking men and women in expensive suits, but we are somehow shocked and angered when a tiny minority of hoodies and chavs take control of large parts of the country for a couple of days.

Sigh.

Rioting for Fun and Profit. A practical guide to the redistribution of wealth. This photo was looted from the Daily Mail, a self-styled "newspaper" with right wing leanings, printed in England.

"What improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconveniency to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."


The Wealth Of Nations, Book I Chapter VIII

British Life To Change Forever

David Cameron or Nick Clegg warned today that he would change forever the way the British lived. Dismissing accusations of social engineering as “the whining of wound-licking socialist running dogs” he stated “there is no such thing as society, therefore there can be no such thing as social engineering.”

The UK prime minister warned that the cuts to public services would be unpleasant, however the good news was that he would never meet those most affected by the changes at a dinner party. He went on to say that unpleasant things were always good for you, which meant the cuts were Common Sense and the Right Thing to do. The war in Iraq and the medicine his nanny used to give him were proof if proof were needed, he added.

Speaking later at a London private club to an audience of Daily Mail readers bussed in from Middle England David Cameron or Nick Clegg said “in layman’s terms the problem with the NHS and social welfare is that they simply do not make any money.” He then went on to attack the idea that these services were necessary. “I’ve never had to use them, and I can’t see why anyone else would need to either.”

“These cuts are not motivated by ideology, they are simply Common Sense. We plan to close the NHS and stop welfare payments to voters in the North.” He then went on to talk about the importance of continuity, pledging to continue the Labour Party’s policy of donating tax revenue to the banks. “They make excellent profits, and this is Good Business.”

Hitting back at criticism he said “suggestions that public spending can somehow support growth and improve the economy are the insane ravings of the sort of left-wing university intellectuals who never invited me to their parties at Oxford.” Stepping back from the microphone he then punched the air and shouted, "who's the daddy? I own you bitches" before continuing to lay out the government's planned cuts.

Inspired by the public apology given recently by Michael Ignatieff, the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, for the excessive cuts of his predecessors David Cameron or Nick Clegg announced that the UK government would quickly form a Canadian-style Star Chamber of Private Sector experts to make government more efficient. “The speed with which BP have dealt with the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico should be a lesson to us all” he shouted over rapturous applause from the Daily Mail readers.

After the speech James Kirk, a Daily Mail reader from Penge said “finally we have a government with Common Sense. It’s about time those scroungers in the North stopped taking out of the taxpayer’s pocket. If they want health care they should cash in some of their investments to pay for it like I do.”

“At last we've got a proper English government that we can look up to instead of all those fucking Jocks.”

A hommage of sorts to the Daily Mash

Breathing New Life into an Old Routine

There’s a new coalition government in the UK and it seems there are commentators in the press who are worried that the ConDem Alliance will somehow fail the country. They worry that a government of two halves will not be able to make timely and accurate decisions, will compromise, fudge issues and fail to deliver on its election pledges. Surely not?

Aside from lobbyists having to work twice as hard with twice the budget it should be business as usual. What the press commentators fail to remember is that England has a long history of such alliances stretching back nearly a century. From Flanagan and Allen through Morecambe and Wise, Cannon and Ball to Reeves and Mortimer, the double act is a tried and tested method for pleasing the punters and should do well in the House of Commons. Here’s what Wikipedia says about it:

“The template for the modern double act began in the British music halls and the American vaudeville scene of the late nineteenth century. Here, the "straight man" was a necessity as he would repeat the lines of the "comic". This was done simply because the audience would be noisy, and repeating the joke gave the audience a fighting chance of hearing the joke and the comedians a fighting chance of getting a good reaction. Soon the dynamic developed so that the "straight man" became a more integral part of the act, setting up jokes that the comic could then deliver the "punchline" to.”

Which one will be the straight man? Who will get the louder laughs? It’s an exciting time in English politics and it’s all still up for grabs.

More about the double act on Wikipedia